I suppose it comes down to our definiton of the word "expert." You seem to be using that as a synonym for "professional." I don't think it is. I question the very idea that the word "expert" should be applied to a game designer.
Actually, here I agree with you. I don't think that the field of game design has been taken seriously (even by its own proponents, which is critical here) for a long enough time for it to nurture the development of real experts.
They had to create the expertise feats in the PHB II to help fix the broken math of 4E. They may be professionals, but they have flubbed things plenty of times, so I'm not going to take their word that something is okay because they said so and "everything" is core. I know you love 4E, and WotC as well, but your defense of their so called expertise is starting to seem quite irrational.I don't think it is. The only advice I've given is to wait until you've seen a rule element in play before declaring it "broken", "unusable" or "banned."
Scott, that is the first time I've seen you say something I vehemently disagree with. As it turns out, solid critical thinking skills coupled with some research do often lead to better conclusions than listening to the so-called experts.I grant there are some things I won't argue with, but refusing to question authority is no virtue.
I've made an argument similar to Scott's in the past because it is a pet peeve of mine as well. D&D encourages you to think about and tinker with the rules, and it's what we do day in and day out. As DMs, we make calls about what the players can/can't do, we make judgment calls about what is/isn't balanced.
But, at the end of the day, we're not really operating at the same level of expertise as those who publish day in and day out. My pet peeve is the whole "I read it and know it's unbalanced" line of egotistical thought. 3e is littered with examples of classes, powers, etc. that people have deemed too powerful because they are so very smart and understand game balance oh so well, but which are fine in actual play.
Basically, if something looks out of whack in a published book, I take a step back and say "Am I missing something?" Because I know that the person who wrote it is probably much better than I am at figuring out from simply writing up an ability whether it is balanced or not. I give them the benefit of the doubt that they didn't just slap something broken down and didn't consider the issues that seem obvious and problematic to me.
The poster child for this for me is the Mystic Theurge, which was decried as being terribly unbalanced and banned in many games, but is well balanced and even slightly weak in play under the core rules.
Obviously, the designers can't account for every possible interaction of the rules in every splatbook, so I'm much more sympathetic to arguments saying that the combination of certain powers/rules creates a broken game situation. But the argument that something is obviously...
I respect your opinion (as well as Scott's). I understand your point. In fact, I generally agree with it. Most people (myself included) are not better equipped to judge balance that WotC. For the most part, I won't change rules because I assume the designers know what they're doing. However, in a few cases, I've caught them being blatantly *wrong* in the math department. No amount of appealing to their expertise is going to change my mind.
To give an example: In the 3.5E Unearthed Arcana, there is a discussion about the pros and cons of armor as damage reduction. The entire discussion is predicated on the (blatantly incorrect) idea that a +1 to hit results in hitting 5% more often. In fact, it can mean hitting 100% more often (you needed exactly a 20); it can mean hitting 0% more often (you needed a 2, or a natural 20). Assuming around a 50/50 chance to hit, then +1 is a 10% greater chance to hit. At no possible target number, however, does a +1 give you a 5% greater chance to hit (5.26% is as close as it gets). This is obvious at a (aforementioned) glance, yet it is right there in the book. If math like that is what they use all the time, then I'll trust my (amateur) self, thank you very much. ;-)
Like this?They had to create the expertise feats in the PHB II to help fix the broken math of 4E. They may be professionals, but they have flubbed things plenty of times, so I'm not going to take their word that something is okay because they said so and "everything" is core. I know you love 4E, and WotC as well, but your defense of their so called expertise is starting to seem quite irrational.I don't think it is. The only advice I've given is to wait until you've seen a rule element in play before declaring it "broken", "unusable" or "banned."
Which is, actually, a pretty good illustration of how someone without a deep, nuanced understanding of the system (and this isn't a reflection on Clark at all; as I pointed out in that thread, at this point very few people have that requisite understanding of the system) can pretty easily make drastic errors in judgment.
|
Basically, this.
There was some talk in the past about the "reads bad, plays well" nature of certain rule...
I think another good example of this is the "Hybrid Class" playtest going on right now. At first, I was very unhappy as to how it would play out, BUT ... being the stubborn old coot I am I decided to play one in a game. I haven't gotten far enough to quip "OMG!" to anything yet, but my initial perception is that it might be a little on the weak side itself. We'll see.
I have to admit that 4E has rapidly become a very good system in my mind. Prior to PHB1, I felt that it was a solid game system, but things felt missing to me. I know that PHB2 didn't do much other than add some flesh to the framework, but I am LOVING 4E right now, and am very excited to be playing!
Getting back to the PDF issue:
Meh. I wish it weren't what it is, but it is. Here's to hoping that they can resolve the issues soon to the betterment of all involved.
Like this?Which is, actually, a pretty good illustration of how someone without a deep, nuanced understanding of the system can pretty easily make drastic errors in judgment.
Errr ....
I think, Scott, is what he's doing is comparing your "This is broken - they don't know what they're doing" comment against Clark as the "expert" in this example. The important distinction in this specific example, however, is that the power quoted was just a quick "I wonder if..." brainstorming, and not an actual rule published in a book.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
My son got Jar Jar last week!!!Really? Because my... uh... son also needs Star Wars figures.I think there's support groups for that.Plus, my son needs Star Wars figures and such crap, and Hasbro makes all that, so my hatred looks hypocritical somehow.Your son "needs" Star Wars figures? Don't you mean that he "wants" Star Wars figures?
I would like to get my son addicted to Star Wars (mostly so that I can play with his toys). Do you have any advice about how to get him hooked?
Chief Technical Officer
|
I would like to get my son addicted to Star Wars (mostly so that I can play with his toys). Do you have any advice about how to get him hooked?My son got Jar Jar last week!!!Really? Because my... uh... son also needs Star Wars figures.I think there's support groups for that.Plus, my son needs Star Wars figures and such crap, and Hasbro makes all that, so my hatred looks hypocritical somehow.Your son "needs" Star Wars figures? Don't you mean that he "wants" Star Wars figures?
One word: Lightsabers.
One word: Lightsabers.I would like to get my son addicted to Star Wars (mostly so that I can play with his toys). Do you have any advice about how to get him hooked?My son got Jar Jar last week!!!Really? Because my... uh... son also needs Star Wars figures.I think there's support groups for that.Plus, my son needs Star Wars figures and such crap, and Hasbro makes all that, so my hatred looks hypocritical somehow.Your son "needs" Star Wars figures? Don't you mean that he "wants" Star Wars figures?
That's what got my son hooked.
I think, Scott, is what he's doing is comparing your "This is broken - they don't know what they're doing" comment against Clark as the "expert" in this example. The important distinction in this specific example, however, is that the power quoted was just a quick "I wonder if..." brainstorming, and not an actual rule published in a book.
Clark (again, not meant to reflect on him in anyway) by his own admission in that thread was not very familiar with 4th Edition design. I doubt even he would consider himself an expert. That was much more akin to two people learning the system and one critiquing the other's work. But you're right, I don't think the power write-up he provided was ever planned to survive as part of a finished product.
Clark (again, not meant to reflect on him in anyway) by his own admission in that thread was not very familiar with 4th Edition design.
Where? I didn't see that comment when reading through the linked thread.
Either way, this is the situation I see. You didn't understand what the designer was doing, but that didn't stop you from trying to note that you were more aware of balance issues than the professional. This to me seems to be the same sort of responses you are criticizing now.
Similarly, I would think that your comments about trusting experts goes against arguing with a company that has made adventure for a good chunk of their business for several years over what they can, can't do with 4th edition and whether or not they should. This seems to be the same situation of claiming one knows more than the "experts."
It could be that one doesn't consider the people experts, but what is to stop from believing that WotC employees are not experts either, and therefore not necessarily given the trust that has been described befitting an expert.
"Pfff, sure, they may be experts, but what the heck do they know about my life?" That very sentiment is one of the most dangerous, unhealthy convictions that an individual can possess.
No worse than following false "experts".
Blindly following others because they tell you they're experts can be extremely unhealthy.
For me, wizards has dropped the ball a couple of times too often to be considered experts any more.
I still can't quite figure out why you come to this particular board, KaeYoss.Such a waste if you want to throw away the stuff five minutes after you get it....
I, for one, won't judge a book by its (hard)cover.
Well, obviously so you can feel better about yourself by construing everything I say as an attack on Saint Wotc and castigating me for it. :))
By the way: I still haven't read the part about board rules that state "love it or leave it". You seem to feel threatened by the fact that not everyone shares your adoration of wizards, but you'll have to live with that around here. If you want a place that is policed and those who don't like 4e are bullied away or banned, I can give you a couple of links where you'll feel a lot better.
But these boards allow actual discussion. And that will never change.
Well, obviously so you can feel better about yourself by construing everything I say as an attack on Saint Wotc and castigating me for it. :))
By the way: I still haven't read the part about board rules that state "love it or leave it". You seem to feel threatened by the fact that not everyone shares your adoration of wizards, but you'll have to live with that around here. If you want a place that is policed and those who don't like 4e are bullied away or banned, I can give you a couple of links where you'll feel a lot better.
But these boards allow actual discussion. And that will never change.
Actually, if you take a glance at the top of this very forum, you'll find the following:
"Talk about 4th Edition here. Politely. Personal attacks or insults directed at other members of the Paizo community, or other companies in the industry, will not be tolerated."
This, of course, hasn't really ever been true. Such attacks and insults appear with some frequency here, and are almost uniformly ignored by anything resembling actual moderation. But the rule does exist, whether or not you choose to follow it.
It isn't so much that you shouldn't come to the 4E boards to post your 4E-digs for no other purpose then insulting the game and telling people how bad it is even though many people are enjoying.
It is more that you should come to the 4E boards with valid discussions. We are here to discuss 4E and elements of said game but I find people continuously coming to 4E forums just to post useless attacks against the game. I don't go to the 3.x forums or the Pathfinder forum to post useless attacks about how broken 3.x was or how I don't see Pathfinder being different because it is based on the 3.x system. I am respectful enough to let other people enjoy their sandboxes but some people do not even seems to have that.
In an attempt to be somewhat on topic, I don't think this is the death of pdfs. I don't even think this is the death of the "History of D&D" as Wizards have already stated they are looking into alternate methods for releasing the digital material (though I admit that I have no doubt they are going to fail to make it "pirate-proof" because when complicated DRM programmed into games can't do it then what chance does Wizards have?).
"Talk about 4th Edition here. Politely. Personal attacks or insults directed at other members of the Paizo community, or other companies in the industry, will not be tolerated."This, of course, hasn't really ever been true. Such attacks and insults appear with some frequency here, and are almost uniformly ignored by anything resembling actual moderation. But the rule does exist, whether or not you choose to follow it.
Saying that I won't buy 4e, that I think it's crap, and that wizards has lost all credibility does not violate any of this.
Incidentally, I have another answer for your original question: This is a thread of personal interest to me, as the whole PDF issue has angered me. Since someone chose to open this thread in the 4e boards, I come to the 4e boards in order to discuss this.
Anyway, implying people have no right to be here can be considered an insult, too, so tread lightly.
insulting the game
Come again?
How can I insult a game? It's called criticism. And it's very much allowed, even encouraged. If I say, for example, that I don't consider 4e to be D&D, or a roleplaying game for that matter, that's valid criticism. Don't try to silence the critics by villainising them. The game is not God's gift to gamers that everybody likes. There are people who don't like it, and there are people who don't like what wizards is doing.
If there is a discussion about their latest stunt, I can, and will, take part and voice my concerns and opinions.
I am respectful enough to let other people enjoy their sandboxes but some people do not even seems to have that.
Do you realise that you try to pass off criticism as attempts to ruin other people's days? Is that a conscious effort to silence those who don't agree to your opinion or is it something you do without noticing? Because that's what it sounds like.
I for one don't mind people voicing their concerns about D&D and Pathfinder, and I always try my best to respond to those concerns. I don't keep telling people to go away if they haven't drunk the kool-aid.
I don't even think this is the death of the "History of D&D" as Wizards have already stated they are looking into alternate methods for releasing the digital material
Lately, though, what they state and what they do hasn't been the same. I can remember them promising PDFs for "the price of a cup of coffee". But I don't see them. And unless I'm wrong, even when the PDFs were available, they cost a lot more than a cup of coffee (unless you buy your coffee in some posh shop where it is spiked with gold leaf or something).
And the reason they said they were stopping the sale of all PDFs just cannot be the reason they really did it. Because they would be incredibly unwise to think that they can stop the illegal distribution of PDFs that have already been released. Most of them have been available for years, and all it takes for the distribution channels to get going is them being available for long enough that someone who knows how to distribute that stuff to get the book. I'd say a couple of hours. The cat has not only been out of the bag, it has reduced the bag to tiny shreds and savaged the face of the guy who made the bag.
(though I admit that I have no doubt they are going to fail to make it "pirate-proof" because when complicated DRM programmed into games can't do it then what chance does Wizards have?).
I wouldn't call copy protection DRM - though I guess games like WoW (or anything you have to log on online in order to play) have a better time of it.
A better comparison is music. DRM was tried there, and it failed miserably. The last label that clung to DRM abandoned it some time ago. And if the music industry (which rake in the kind of profit the whole RPG business can only have wet dreams about) can't pull it off, the chances of wizards really succeeding are even less than zero.
But I think that if we're looking at WoW, we see the future of electronic RPG books. Not PDFs - I very much doubt that wizards will offer them in the future - but some format you can only look at while you're online. Like WoW, you'll probably have to pay both for the content itself and for the right to be online and use it.
Of coruse, unlike WoW, you get no real use out of this (a book is not a massive multiplayer environment where you interact with others and the world is in constant change), but I doubt that will stop them.
And of course, that won't really stop those who want to make the stuff available for free: They'll find a way to make the stuff downloadable, with all content and layout intact, and supply it for free.
As with so many measures that are used to "counter piracy", it will only really inconvenience the honest customer. And, of course, mean that you'll have to pay twice, and have to keep paying if you don't want to lose access.
Insult
1. to treat or speak to insolently or with contemptuous rudeness; affront.
2. to affect as an affront; offend or demean.
3. Archaic. to attack; assault.
Criticism
1. the act of passing judgment as to the merits of anything.
2. the act of passing severe judgment; censure; faultfinding.
3. the act or art of analyzing and evaluating or judging the quality of a literary or artistic work, musical performance, art exhibit, dramatic production, etc.
4. a critical comment, article, or essay; critique.
5. any of various methods of studying texts or documents for the purpose of dating or reconstructing them, evaluating their authenticity, analyzing their content or style, etc.: historical criticism; literary criticism.
6. investigation of the text, origin, etc., of literary documents, esp. Biblical ones: textual criticism.
Maybe I would just ideally like people that are going to offer criticism do so in a constructive manner. There is a billion and one people that come into a 4E forum to do nothing but go "I don't play 4E. 4E sucks." and doesn't offer anything to the discussion, most of these people admit that they do not and will not even try 4E. 4E may not be god's gift to gaming but that doesn't mean that it isn't god's gift to some people. I am not talking about people "voicing their concerns" I am talking about people blasting a game. My concern with the Pathfinder RPG is that it is rooted in 3.x and therefore I do not feel that it has anything to offer me that wouldn't be in line with the same brokeness of 3.x and is completely useless to anyone that has realized the truth about 3.x.
Wizards is hardly the only publisher not offering pdfs for the "price of a cup of coffee". Alot of the major 3PP overprice their pdfs considerable and the only pdfs I normally use the price of a cup of coffee are the newer or less known 3PP. Of course if they did offer pdfs for that cheap then of course the brick and mortar stores would complain as some of them did when Paizo and other places offered discounted pdfs in response to Wizards silly reaction to pdfs. I admit that I found the subtle jabs by these companies at Wizards to be amusing.
As to the DRM issue: I was thinking more along the lines of the "recent" Spore DRM debactle. Originally the DRM only allowed your to install the game 3 times and it blew up in their face when people found out about it so they increased it to 5 times. I bet there was a small amount of people that got the pirated versions out just because of that. I think Wizards is being to idealistic in thinking they can make pirate-proof digital material. Even if they use a log-in only viewer someone will come along with something like CutePDF and print the webpage into a PDF. Draconian anti-piracy measures just make the honest consumer mad and are just minor inconvenience to pirates. This knee-jerk reaction didn't stop Arcane Power from getting onto the p2p networks bookmarked, scanned, searchable.
|
The PDF issue shouldn't be on the 4E boards in the first place. It has no direct bearing on the game and should be restricted to whatever general board is appropriate.
I would like to think this board is a place for people to discuss 4E including valid and constructive criticism or even opinion (as long as it's expressed as such), not WOTC business practices. Sadly many of the anti-4E/Wotc posters have taken to using it as a personal soapbox.
I advocated decent moderation during the height of the flame wars and stand by that opinion, these boards are treated as a laughing stock of rabid anti-4Eism on other boards, a far cry from the respect and community from when I first started lurking here.
You don't have to agree with Wotc and it's PDF approach but can't we just let it drop now? It has been discussed to death, or at least move it to a more appropriate board.
Saying that I won't buy 4e, that I think it's crap, and that wizards has lost all credibility does not violate any of this.
I see. I'm not buying what you're saying, I think your opinions are crap, and you have no credibility with me. Glad to know that's okay.
I advocated decent moderation during the height of the flame wars and stand by that opinion, these boards are treated as a laughing stock of rabid anti-4Eism on other boards, a far cry from the respect and community from when I first started lurking here.
Did you just insult those of us who dislike 4e?[/sarcasm]
Considering the other boards mentioned are (probably) places where consumers caught up in an abusive relationship with WotC tend to reside, I'm okay with that.
And as far as community goes around here, if you pay close attention you will notice that fans of 4e who voice their like of the system go unmolested. Those righteous defenders of the almighty god WotC that insist on showing the infidels the error of their heathen ways on the other hand...
I see. I'm not buying what you're saying, I think your opinions are crap, and you have no credibility with me. Glad to know that's okay.Saying that I won't buy 4e, that I think it's crap, and that wizards has lost all credibility does not violate any of this.
Of course it isn't okay. Haven't you been reading the posts by Arcmagik and Scott Betts? How dare you go against their ideals of how this forum should be run.
You should leave immediately.
|
|
I advocated decent moderation during the height of the flame wars and stand by that opinion, these boards are treated as a laughing stock of rabid anti-4Eism on other boards, a far cry from the respect and community from when I first started lurking here.Did you just insult those of us who dislike 4e?[/sarcasm]
It depends! Are you a rabid anti-4Eist who only posts here to say how much he dislikes the game and the people who play it? If yes I suppose I inadvertently did.
Considering the other boards mentioned are (probably) places where consumers caught up in an abusive relationship with WotC tend to reside, I'm okay with that.
Wotc, yes. Also Enworld, RPGnet, Goodmans, The Piazza etc. A few others that are diehard grognard sites equally disdainful of anything beyond 1e (as is their right) but laughing at those who have nothing better to do than waste their time spewing vitriol on boards that are clearly labelled for the game they espouse to dislike. Each of those sites have fans for & against 4E, but the one of the few things they agree on is how laughable these boards have become thanks to ZERO moderation.
And as far as community goes around here, if you pay close attention you will notice that fans of 4e who voice their like of the system go unmolested.
So fans of the game, posting on boards set aside for discussion of that game go unmolested?? I don't believe it?? And it's not completely true, how many discussions are derailed or even started by those with no interest in the game, [sarcasm]only their POV that the evil & satanic Wotc must be stopped and this blasphemy they call a game erased from existence.[/sarcasm]
Those righteous defenders of the almighty god WotC that insist on showing the infidels the error of their heathen ways on the other hand...
Hmm, fans on a secton of the messageboards about a game they like jumping to the defence of the company making it.......it's just unbeleivable! FFS what do you expect? It's like going to one of those gun shows the americans have or an NRA meeting and shouting "down with GUNS!!"
I see. I'm not buying what you're saying, I think your opinions are crap, and you have no credibility with me. Glad to know that's okay.Saying that I won't buy 4e, that I think it's crap, and that wizards has lost all credibility does not violate any of this.
Of course it isn't okay. Haven't you been reading the posts by Arcmagik and Scott Betts? How dare you go against their ideals of how this forum should be run.
You should leave immediately.
Yes if you don't hate Wotc or 4E and can't understand why you are not permitted to discuss the game/products you enjoy in a civil and positive environment you should leave. That is what a vocal minority want after all.
Wizards is hardly the only publisher not offering pdfs for the "price of a cup of coffee".
But wizards is the only publisher that made that promise. And that's the issue.
Of course if they did offer pdfs for that cheap then of course the brick and mortar stores would complain
The brick and mortar stores could not be further from my concerns.
And those PDFs for that price were promised to those who bought the print product, so the stores have no grounds for complaint.
as some of them did when Paizo and other places offered discounted pdfs in response to Wizards silly reaction to pdfs. I admit that I found the subtle jabs by these companies at Wizards to be amusing.
What you find "amusing" is companies who hear their customers and give them what they want. That's what companies are supposed to do. Customers want PDFs, companies give PDFs. That encourages me as a customer to give money to that company, instead of getting that stuff for free on the net.
As to the DRM issue: I was thinking more along the lines of the "recent" Spore DRM debactle. Originally the DRM only allowed your to install the game 3 times and it blew up in their face when people found out about it so they increased it to 5 times. I bet there was a small amount of people that got the pirated versions out just because of that.
I know I was mildly interested in that game until I heard about that crap. Another 50 bucks or so saved.
And apparently, the system had glitches. Someone I know bought the game and it said that he had already used up all his installs. I think he had to call them to get them to unlock the key one more time or something like that.
I think Wizards is being to idealistic in thinking they can make pirate-proof digital material.
If by idealistic you mean naive, then I agree.
But just as with the Spore debacle, this only encourages people to get illegal copies. wizards (and other companies that are making such blunders) need to realise that you can't fight piracy by discouraging it. And you can definetly not fight it by encouraging it. You have to encourage people to get the stuff legally.
This knee-jerk reaction didn't stop Arcane Power from getting onto the p2p networks bookmarked, scanned, searchable.
On that we agree. PDFs like that were around before the PDF market. Instead of getting rid of watermarks and the like, they now have to do the old work again. They were ready to do it before, and they'll be ready to do it again.
these boards are treated as a laughing stock of rabid anti-4Eism on other boards
That's okay, other boards are treated as a laughing stock of rabid pro-4eism. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
You don't have to agree with Wotc and it's PDF approach but can't we just let it drop now? It has been discussed to death, or at least move it to a more appropriate board.
Flag the thread and request it be moved, then. We can't do it ourselves.
|
|
these boards are treated as a laughing stock of rabid anti-4Eism on other boardsThat's okay, other boards are treated as a laughing stock of rabid pro-4eism. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
Arguable but a valid point, but it's worth reiterating that these boards are set aside to discuss 4E.
Flag the thread and request it be moved, then. We can't do it ourselves.
You don't have to agree with Wotc and it's PDF approach but can't we just let it drop now? It has been discussed to death, or at least move it to a more appropriate board.
Good idea. Thanks.
***Moderators please note I'm not flagging myself as insulting or abusive just the thread. Couldn't see any other way to do it. And just to clarify no one has been particularly unpleasant or rude/abusive but this thread has run it's course and is not far from becoming an argument***
Wotc, yes. Also Enworld, RPGnet, Goodmans, The Piazza etc. A few others that are diehard grognard sites equally disdainful of anything beyond 1e (as is their right) but laughing at those who have nothing better to do than waste their time spewing vitriol on boards that are clearly labelled for the game they espouse to dislike. Each of those sites have fans for & against 4E, but the one of the few things they agree on is how laughable these boards have become thanks to ZERO moderation.
By attaching WotC to the list of sites, I feel that you have significantly damaged this argument in mind. Since most of the descriptions of Paizo and the forum have fallen under lies, misconceptions, and insults rather than anything else. I find it likely that the these boards are a joke on other forums are often people just repeating these things. People that pretty much know nothing about the forum but just repeat what they heard, or find that misrepresenting the forum to be more entertaining.
Also, I would think that it means no moderation, but I'm pretty sure that isn't the case since I recall several instances of moderation. But I guess goes to confirming that people on other forums are just repeating statements that are not true.
I don't see any big reason to care about what people say on other forums about here when they are saying incorrect things.
Having been a lurker on these forums for many years and sometimes a poster, I can agree with the statement that these forums went from being some of the best RPG orientated forums on the internet to being an utter sack of s@@%. Few people on these boards are truly interested in discussing 4e and those that are generally end up drowned under the tidal morass of anti-4e-ism.
I suggest that those of you who actually are interested in discuss and talking about 4e move to some of the other forums mentioned, as this one really has become a shadow of its former self.
Congratulations!
I think there are a good number of solid posters on these boards. I think there are quite a few people who aren't die hard fans of 4E, but still able to carry on perfectly civil conversations about interesting areas of the game. But... there are also a handful of people absolutely devoted to attacking 4E and taking every opportunity to derail threads. And there are a lot of people that wander in from the general paizo forums to randomly spout why they don't like 4E, not releasing how frustrating that is for the rest of the posters in this forum.
I've actually seen a few of your own posts that make me think this way of you sometimes. I recall a post a little bit back that seemed to go out of the way to get a quick jab at previous editions. I thought of it just like those posts that just throw in an attack at 4th edition part way through. It seemed to me that you were trying to start an argument and derail the thread.
Arguable but a valid point, but it's worth reiterating that these boards are set aside to discuss 4E.
It's also worth reiterating that those other boards aren't officially exclusive to 4e, either. And that there's always the possibility that the people who consider these boards a laughingstock are rabid fanboys who say that because we don't worship st. wizards here. Just saying. I couldn't know, because no one ever said what boards we're talking about.
***Moderators please note I'm not flagging myself as insulting or abusive just the thread. Couldn't see any other way to do it. And just to clarify no one has been particularly unpleasant or rude/abusive but this thread has run it's course and is not far from becoming an argument***
Note that you can pick a reason for flagging, and one possible reason is "Thread's on wrong forum".
But now you have flagged yourself for being rude, and they know you must know about that, they *have* to punish you. Prepare getting a really embarassing avatar and/or title.
Few people on these boards are truly interested in discussing 4e and those that are generally end up drowned under the tidal morass of anti-4e-ism.
Where have they been drowned under a "tidal morass of anti-4e-ism?" Because all I have seen have been at most a handful of (let's say) anti-4e posters arguing with a handful of (let's say) pro-4e posters. That would seem to indicate that they are being drowned under a combine mix of anti-4e-ism and pro-4e-ism, rather than just the one.
It's also worth reiterating that those other boards aren't officially exclusive to 4e, either. And that there's always the possibility that the people who consider these boards a laughingstock are rabid fanboys who say that because we don't worship st. wizards here. Just saying. I couldn't know, because no one ever said what boards we're talking about.
Arguable but a valid point, but it's worth reiterating that these boards are set aside to discuss 4E.
I don't think the majority of the issue lies with not "worshiping st. wizards," but instead treating other forum members here with a lack of respect. Often enough, there have been people that have just come by into a discussion, their only significant contribution to add being some form of "WotC sucks." I imagine that the person coming by just didn't care about the discussion, and therefore didn't care if his post turned the thread into a stupid argument. Often it isn't because of they thought the thread needed some levity, I would think that it is more because they just didn't care about the discussion and so they decide to be humongous jerks by delivering havoc onto a nice discussion other people were having.
To me they add nothing to this forums and should just have this forum removed from this list they can see or be banned entirely because they seem to think that any 4e talk is not worth caring about.
Here was a list of boards that he said.
Wotc, yes. Also Enworld, RPGnet, Goodmans, The Piazza etc. A few others that are diehard grognard sites equally disdainful of anything beyond 1e (as is their right) but laughing at those who have nothing better to do than waste their time spewing vitriol on boards that are clearly labelled for the game they espouse to dislike.
I've actually seen a few of your own posts that make me think this way of you sometimes. I recall a post a little bit back that seemed to go out of the way to get a quick jab at previous editions. I thought of it just like those posts that just throw in an attack at 4th edition part way through. It seemed to me that you were trying to start an argument and derail the thread.
I can certainly understand that viewpoint, and that is why I have tried to be very careful any time a thread involves comparisons between editions.
Don't get me wrong - I am sure there have been times I have given criticism of a prior edition. But I have done my best to only discuss a past edition when it is appropriate - typically in the threads discussing why WotC made certain changes for 4E, for example. It is impossible to discuss those changes without giving a reason for them, and many people choose to interpret that as attacks upon 3rd Edition and those who play it. And, really, nothing I can say, nor any way I phrase things, is going to prevent some people from being offended.
I understand that and admit that from a slightly different perspective from might it might have seemed more or less harmless. I was just considering that many of the long arguments on the forum were not started by a post that only sought to say "this game sucks" before flying off.
That more often they were decent sized posts with, what I would consider, one poorly chosen comment. Following that another person ignores the bulk of that post to go after that poorly chosen comment. That post sometimes going too far in the argument against the comment, bringing in people that wish to argue against it. Then it just becomes polarized and continues with both sides not wanting to give an inch or "lose" the argument.
I think that the best way to defeat this arguments might often be just to let that one comment you disagree with slide unless you really want to turn the thread into an argument over that specific point.
But I think that is a different situation (regardless of whether my comments end up as civil as they are meant or not) from those you mention who pop into unrelated threads, toss out a complaint about 4E, and vanish. Like you said - if there was a way to fix these forums so that posts from here didn't show up unless they went looking for them,...
Maybe, but I'm not sure about that. I think that the vast majority of posters that don't care about the forum here would still come here even if there was an option to ignore it. That they would come here anyways to leave their bit of wisdom before moving on to the next section. I think it would stop accidental entries, but I think that those times rarely occur.
While WotC has behaved with an appalling disregard for a big part of its customer base, I don't think we're doing ourselves any favors by pretending 4E gets a fair shake on the website of a company whose lifeblood is people who don't like 4E, WotC, or both. Why would it?
There; I said it. Even though I'm finished with WotC and 4E, I can't see how anyone can seriously argue there isn't anti-4E dogpiling going on here. There is a whole lot of unresolved (sometimes quite justified) anger toward WotC, and it often comes to the surface in only tangentally related threads (such as this one, for example).
While WotC has behaved with an appalling disregard for a big part of its customer base, I don't think we're doing ourselves any favors by pretending 4E gets a fair shake on the website of a company whose lifeblood is people who don't like 4E, WotC, or both. Why would it?
There; I said it. Even though I'm finished with WotC and 4E, I can't see how anyone can seriously argue there isn't anti-4E dogpiling going on here. There is a whole lot of unresolved (sometimes quite justified) anger toward WotC, and it often comes to the surface in only tangentally related threads (such as this one, for example).
I want to note that I would never suggest that anti-4e dog-piling is absent from this forum, or that topics here are fair and met without bias. I think however people are over playing the anti-4e posters role on this forum. From descriptions above, some seemed to be implying that only those posts were crowding out sensible discussion, when in fact those posts are either far and few or are part of some big back and forth between them and those that argue against them. That posts specifying "the problem" seem to only target that other side, even if members on their own side are helping to cause the problem.
|
|
One word: Lightsabers.
My sons got to build their own Lightsabers at Disney last year when we were at Disney Marketplace. This led to an explosion of Lightsaber acquisition in my neighborhood. The kids in the next development over had a Medieval Knight thing going on because we are close to a Medieval Times here in Atlanta. This lead to rather epic battles of Lightsaber wielding padawan and shield and sword toting squires up and down our streets and across our playgrounds.
The force won out...
Childhood rocks.
I checked to see if I could still get the free revised Tomb of Horrors from the WotC archive, and I was happy to find all the adventure pdfs still there. Check out the Tower of Deception by Monte Cook!
|
Experts aren't always right. They're wrong, occasionally. You named a few well-known and well-publicized examples of experts being mistaken (conveniently glossing over that, in each case, the mistakes were corrected by other experts), but the point isn't that experts are infallible. It's that they're less fallible than people who aren't experts.
Actually "experts" still agree that spanking leads to psycological trauma, it's just a wealth of human examples to the contrary that lead most people to ignore the experts on that one. And way to take something I said way to the other end of the spectrum. I was merely pointing out that "always" trusting experts can lead to serious problems, in no way did I say you shouldn't in general trust the experts.
In the meantime while in general I do wonder what some posters like KaeYoss and WotC's Nightmare are even doing here I find that a lot of times you are equally abrasive and just as problematic to this forum as they are. Granted a lot of times you do post helpful things and you genuinely are involved with 4e but when you get into defensive mode you sometimes lambast people who even slightly agree with some things said by said "anti 4e" posters and in doing so risk driving people on the fence away.
I know of two times now that I have almost said "well f this" after reading something you've said about my comments when I'm genuinely trying to follow 4e because while it's not my edition of choice I do want to keep up because I know several players whom I have much affection for who I know would prefer the system even if I don't. Luckily I'm thick skinned and I know that typically other than the anti 4e detractors and occasionally the overly defensive pro 4e advocators I do enjoy discussions on this board and it keeps me abreast of 4e which is good since I don't really go to any other forums, I'm a one forum kinda guy.
Anywho all of that said. On topic and said on another thread while I'm not pissed about this, I am going to hold off on purchasing any 4e books until I can get a reasonably priced pdf as well, and it's funny because before paizo I had no idea how great pdfs are, but since I can get them for free I have become addicted to using them, as a game aid maker (spell cards, print outs of abilities, etc.) I've become addicted to pdfs. I still prefer a book at the game table, but I love having a pdf for when I'm at home creating game aids. I mean I'm running RotR without pdfs, but running it with the beta pdf and the desire to go get the pdfs for RotR is strong whenever I'm doing prep work. I pretty much want pdfs of any book I buy and I won't get them illegally since I have had roomates crash my comp before with virus ridden illegal downloads (I have no trust of pirate sites) If my wife and friends do get a 4e game together I'll still play, but I'll stick to the PH I own. Which if I could I would also get as a PDF but not for the price it was available for before the gank.
In the meantime while in general I do wonder what some posters like KaeYoss and WotC's Nightmare are even doing here I find that a lot of times you are equally abrasive and just as problematic to this forum as they are. Granted a lot of times you do post helpful things and you genuinely are involved with 4e but when you get into defensive mode you sometimes lambast people who even slightly agree with some things said by said "anti 4e" posters and in doing so risk driving people on the fence away.
I know of two times now that I have almost said "well f this" after reading something you've said about my comments when I'm genuinely trying to follow 4e because while it's not my edition of choice I do want to keep up because I know several players whom I have much affection for who I know would prefer the system even if I don't. Luckily I'm thick skinned and I know that typically other than the anti 4e detractors and occasionally the overly defensive pro 4e advocators I do enjoy discussions on this board and it keeps me abreast of 4e which is good since I don't really go to any other forums, I'm a one forum kinda guy.
While I can say with almost utter certainty that I bring far more people to 4th Edition than I might drive away, this discussion is not about me. Please keep your posts on-topic and address the post, not the poster.
In the meantime while in general I do wonder what some posters like KaeYoss and WotC's Nightmare are even doing here
Discussing.
In this specific case, discussing the Death of PDFs.
Note that I'm not, like people imply, replying to every thread with "4e sux". But this is a matter of interest to me.
But I don't want to disappoint, so now I'm going to every thread on the first couple of pages in the 4e forum and just bash 4e, okay?
Or not.
it's funny because before paizo I had no idea how great pdfs are, but since I can get them for free I have become addicted to using them
That's Paizo for you. Raising bars.
I've become addicted to pdfs. I still prefer a book at the game table, but I love having a pdf for when I'm at home creating game aids. I mean I'm running RotR without pdfs, but running it with the beta pdf and the desire to go get the pdfs for RotR is strong whenever I'm doing prep work.
I personally prefer a combo of PDF and print: You have the print to use page by page, but PDFs offer full-text searching.
I pretty much want pdfs of any book I buy and I won't get them illegally since I have had roomates crash my comp before with virus ridden illegal downloads (I have no trust of pirate sites)
Well, I do have a decent virus scanner. And I'm always suspicious about suspicious files (like a .doc.exe file someone sends me.)
Not that I'm downloading illegal files. I'm just saying that "fear of virii" isn't really a good reason for not getting illegal stuff.
Which if I could I would also get as a PDF but not for the price it was available for before the gank.
Just out of curiousity: How much did those 4e PDFs cost?
Most third-party publishers normally release their PDFs at *roughly* 50% of the book-value.
|
|
I personally prefer a combo of PDF and print: You have the print to use page by page, but PDFs offer full-text searching.
I thought I was getting across that I use a combo of both, print copy at the game, pdf when away from the table. But as far as searchable text goes, I guess I'm naturally gifted with remembering basic layouts of books, but I can generally find what I'm looking for before someone with a PDF. I've usually made it a race with the guy with the laptop (different guys at different tables) and I win 9 times out of 10.
Just out of curiousity: How much did those 4e PDFs cost?
Well I don't remember what it cost exactly but it was over $20 which is the breaking point for me on a PDF purchase. Especially if I've already paid for a dead tree format.
While I can say with almost utter certainty that I bring far more people to 4th Edition than I might drive away, this discussion is not about me.
I tend to disagree with that assessment.
While I can say with almost utter certainty that I bring far more people to 4th Edition than I might drive away, this discussion is not about me.I tend to disagree with that assessment.
Yes, Blazej, we know. Please keep the discussion on topic.
|
Yes, Blazej, we know. Please keep the discussion on topic.While I can say with almost utter certainty that I bring far more people to 4th Edition than I might drive away, this discussion is not about me.I tend to disagree with that assessment.
I tend to agree with Blazej I call it the Colin Mack affect
I tend to agree with BlazejYes, Blazej, we know. Please keep the discussion on topic.While I can say with almost utter certainty that I bring far more people to 4th Edition than I might drive away, this discussion is not about me.I tend to disagree with that assessment.
Again, please keep the discussion on topic.
heh, well it's not been on topic for a while now :)